David Frownfelder: Washing off the 2012 political campaign

The politics of fear and inclusion defeated the politics of fear and exclusion in the race for the White House.

Both candidates should be ashamed of their campaigns. Opposition to a candidate is one thing, but the pure, blind, unadulterated hatred engendered by the just completed campaign is far beyond anything rational. Political analysts say the sad part is that people pay more attention to the negativity than they do to ads and articles that focus on issues.

Blame the so-called Super PACs, which were created in the wake of the controversial U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010. These shadowy organizations can accept donations of unlimited size from corporations, unions and individuals. They spend the funds mostly on negative advertising. The truth be damned.

The just-completed presidential campaign was one of the most disgusting, lie-filled abominations the United States has ever endured. The divisions in the country far surpass anything during the turbulent 1960s and even the American Civil War and the early days of the country.

The ugliness oozed its way down to the state level. I’m hoping it stops there because we have enough to divide us on the county and local levels without having to resort to the flame-throwing hatred and rhetoric infesting and aimed at the state and federal levels of government.

Nobody came out of this election without smelling badly. The ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court essentially allowed unlimited money to be used to buy and say anything the big-spender wanted to say.

Truth in politics has nothing to do with reality. Winning the argument is all that matters.

The only positive to come out of this campaign is that nobody was lined up against a wall and shot, like often happens in other countries when one government is replaced. The American political system can have a revolution every four years and change the direction of government without people actually losing their lives. Public service has been corrupted by greed and the lust for power.

Oddly enough, one analyst told the Michigan Information and Research Service, a publication focused on Michigan government, that the 2012 campaign was actually quite tame when compared to the 1800 race between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, which became extremely personal. Malcolm Magee, a Michigan State University history professor, said this campaign also pales when put up against the campaign in 1860.

Republican Abraham Lincoln received 39.1 percent of the popular vote, the Democratic party was split in two by the issue of slavery, with Northern Democrat Stephen Douglas receiving 29.5 percent, John Breckenridge from the Southern Democrats, received 18.1 percent. Constitutional Union candidate John Bell got 12.6 percent. As a result of the election, the American Civil War broke out.

As for presidential hatred, not even Richard Nixon, who waged war on the Constitution with his minions and was forced to resign in disgrace, was as vilified as Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. It is one thing to dislike a man’s politics, it is quite another to play fast and loose with the truth about each man.

Each of these three have character flaws that helped shape his administration. Each man was targeted by those in opposition far beyond any decent and human, let alone humane, level.

Politics has become so repugnant, we need to stock up on disinfectant. Better yet, instead of pouring billions of dollars into political campaigns that spread lies, fear and deceit, why not enact some real election reforms? Transparency in data and funding would be a nice change of pace.

Truth is the first casualty in war and politics. It is time to make it prominent instead.

David Frownfelder is a staff writer for The Daily Telegram. He can be contacted at 265-5111, ext. 258, or via email at frownfelder@lenconnect.com.